The Erlang language is ideal for multi-core processing because it's very easy to spread a program out over multiple cores with it.
And from the site's FAQ: 3.3. Which licence is Open Source Erlang shipped with?
The Open Source Erlang Licence is essentially the Mozilla (Netscape) Public Licence with a few modifications to make it compatible with Swedish law.
As far as I understand, this means you can obtain Erlang for free, use it to build cool systems and sell them without Ericsson coming around to charge you money. For an authoritative statement, you'll need a lawyer.
It's open source!
I'm guessing the Mozilla Public Licence is open source enough. Can anybody tell me if there are any problems with the Mozilla Public Licence or the licence of Erlang?
As far as I can see, if the open-source community needs a replacement for C, then Erlang or mono would be best. Both their licences are open-source. And Java's Licence isn't.
I want you guys to tell me if this is correct: - Use Mono C# language and runtime if you want an open-source modern language without buffer overflows and a virtual machine that runs on multiple OSs. - Erlang to use something with the same features as Mono and if you want to run a single program at full speed on multiple processors(cores) and if you don't mind programming in a functional" programming language.
If you want to run it as a fanless (reliable) server, using an AMD will enable you to use ECC memory.
I haven't found reliable evidence that the AOpen board is able to use ECC memory with that functionality enabled. Some sites say it can, some sites say it can't.
As (semi)programmers we know that when a file is ready to be downloaded from a server. The person initiating the download is the person who is instructing the server to make a copy.
Who is the copyright infringer in this scenario? I am not a lawyer but as I understand it, the law is against the act of making a copy, that's why it's called copyright. There's also a seperate law against illegal distribution.
Is the downloader creating the copy? He initiated the process of both the making of the copy and the start of the distribution process.
I know that it's morally true that the "server" operator is responsible in the real world but looking at the letter of the law, and the details of the process, it's the downloader that initiates both processes. It's also true that the person who set up the server is the one who made the whole process possible at all, however, he/she isn't the one who does it.
A good analogy would be a xerox copier just outside of your house with a couple of books next to it, everyone can walk by and copy the books. You're the one who put the copier there and providing the electricity and paper. You're NOT the one forcing people to make the copies and you're also not the person DOING the copying.
P.S. I would like people to discuss this with logical arguments for and against, in the same post if you want to. No twisting the facts with your emotions.
My answer is YES! I'm proud of all those things, except for the last 2 questions.
I don't like the fact that, even though we've lost a lot of our fear of the black dudes coming from our former colony Surinam, we've replaced that with fear of islamic immigrants. Most islamic people I've met were relaxed. Some of them do tend to be too uptight and some mistreat women. Doesn't excuse the Dutch from psychologically putting all of them in the same category.
About my personality. What gave you the idea that I'm neurotic? I'm against neurosis and other strong emotional pressures influencing our important decisions. I thought I explained that. My personal view is to let people do whatever they want as long as they don't negatively influence others around them. I'm not against emotions in daily life because that's where fun and life comes from. However, let's leave them out of our IMPORTANT decisions. Like who to vote for. Emotions are too easily fooled.
It's scary how easy it is for me to pick up women:)
Oh, and what I forgot to say. What you SHOULD do is compare the arguments of a topic, reject the bogus arguments immediately and make a decision based on logic using the other arguments.
You have my permission to not trust the man/woman who gives too many false arguments.
If I was a senior exec at Nokia right now I might be thinking 'well fuck you stallman you ungrateful cunt' as I call the legal dept and ask them to start looking into potential patent infrinments of FOSS.
No no, the senior exec at Nokia is thinking: "Shit! Stallman didn't take the bait".
It all starts with the fact that it's legal for politicians to receive money. We'd call it corruption in the Netherlands.
Fix that fatal flaw in US government and you'll have fixed crap like this. In the long run.
It's really very simple, idiots. Most of you are programmers. You're supposed to see how decisions now influence events in the future but I dont' see anyone discussing the root cause of these things.
I don't think either democrats or republicans will do anything about finance reforms and While voting anything other than democrats will end up strengthening republicans (sherriffs of nottingham) in the PRESIDENTIAL elections.
There are still the votes for congress which are NOT winner take all. If you vote for guys like Ralph Nader for CONGRESS then your vote will put a couple of guys that are not corrupt in power. It's not the presidency but it's a start, a start on the way to finance reform. Only AFTER finance reform will you be able to get a non dem/rep president in office.
The goal is finance reform, the method is not dem/rep so vote something else for congressmen.
This is all my personal opinion, who agrees with me?
To start with an example, let's discuss the pro's and cons of application folders. That is, a program's files are all kept inside 1 directory instead of being installed by spreading files all over the operating system file structure. Apple uses application folders in OS X.
Arguments FOR:
* Human minds and their memory are weak, anything that can help them grasp what constitutes an application is a good thing. It's easy to keep in mind that everything that's in a certain directory is part of that program. It's almost impossible to remember all the names and locations of the files when a program spreads itself out all over the OS. For a clear mental picture of an application, appfolders are superiour. Think of Murphy's law, something WILL go wrong and fixing an appfolder program is then easier than fixing a traditionally installed program.
* Security: It's easier to configure an operating system so that everything in one directory is limited by permissions XYZ. If you have files spread out over the filesystem, they can have their individual permissions changed accidentally. Lower permissions = application breaks. Higher permissions = security risk. In addition, changing the permission of an application is more complicated.
* No more dependencies: Everything the application needs is present. Dependencies suck! They increase efficiency but they suck because they can make an application not run, or not even install. Dependencies are like spaghetti code on an OS level.
* Usability: Looking at it from a higher level, appfolders have better usability for PC users (all of us). To "install" you just drag the appfolder. To install a traditional program, you'll have to use an install wizard. This wizard is not compatible with the UNIX principle of "everything is a file". This wizard does it's magic, you'll have to hope everything works out well (often doesn't) and if you uninstall a program you'll have to keep your fingers crossed again, hope that the installer finds every little file again to delete. Although it's not rock-hard logic, think about this: Apple has the most user friendly system at the moment and they use appfolders. No matter what the other problems will come up because of using appfolders, there is no doubt that from the end-user's perspective, appfolders are user friendlier. Whatever side of the argument you are one, you'll have to agree that more user frienlyness is better than less user friendlyness. PCs should take away work and problems, not add to them.
#
Arguments AGAINST:
* Efficiency: Having every library that a program needs inside it's own appfolder will probably lead to duplication. The exact same library will probably be inside a couple of different appfolders wasting HD space. On top of that, if you load a traditionally shared library into RAM, it is available to be used by another program as well. This trick will save RAM if 2 or more traditional programs use the same library and are running at the same time. - Counter argument: Although HD inefficiency is present with appfolders, HD space limitations are not as bad as they have been in the past. Also, there is undoubtedly a simple system that can overcome RAM waste, for example, you can make a big hashlist of all the libraries in a central spot. Before a program starts, it will look in that list to see if a library it needs has already been loaded in RAM.
* Duplication of effort and compatibility: Most of the applications that have been released so far have been traditional installation applications. Converting to the appfolder system would require a lot of work and a lot of convincing of people. Humans are bad at changing the way they think.
# Please copy the arguments into your post and add to them, in the end we might have a complete overview of the subject and we can make an objective decision on whether appfolders are a good idea overall or not. I'm in favor myself.
I agree with you. I also think that posts in a thread should sometimes make a summary of the arguments for, and against a subject that have been put forward up until that time.
That way, we can compare the list of arguments and the "side" with the best list of arguments "wins" the discussion.
Real simple really, think with logic instead of with your emotions, make overviews of the discussions and decide on merit of the arguments.
I'm going to do that from now on.// and I'll read the fucking article next:)
Thanks for replying, I have to admit that my post should have been better.
- Didn't know that about oil companies.
- About coal being plentiful enough for our energy needs, I suspect you're right but I hope we won't be needing it.
- Third point, I'm aware that the US is a very science oriented country. However, I didn't really want to comment badly about the US in my post, I was pointing the finger more to illogical fundamentalists wherever they may be. However, I do want to defend my US comment a little bit. Science is mostly about logic and that is in very short supply at the moment in the US government. My perception is that the US is really sliding downhill. Illogical religious fanatics should never be in a position of power, no matter how many or how few there are. Make them heel to logic and punish them if they won't listen and do bad. That was my main point.
No, it's not a ripoff, just an adaptation. Yukinobu Hoshino is the artist and he has a lot of respect for James P. Hogan. I guess Dark Horse made a shorter credit line than they should.
I can remember first reading about this fusion concept in the "the two faces of tomorrow" from Dark Horse comics. At the time I thought this was just some ancient sci-fi writer's relic idea on how to achieve fusion, we had tokamak (donut) magnetic fusion reactors now. However, after I read about the real life version of it, I first thought WOW and after that I realized that it might be much simpler to ignite a fusion reaction and then back off to let it run wild than to try to contain a fusion reaction in a magnetic bubble. The concept sounds simpler. They're having trouble with manufacturing the hydrogen pellet however, so the tokamak reactor might have a steadier flow of energy coming out of it if they get the concept to work smoothly.
old-energy corporations
Oil, gas and coal companies might not want this to work. I remember the piece in Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911" about the corporate spy who told his own story. I think he came clean out of guilt over what he'd done in the past. Point I'm trying to make is, there might be a lot of opposition to this project and I hope that they have a lot of security on site. They probably have because this is mostly a military project.
The need for fusion
I do think earth will eventually need fusion reactors, at least the USA needs it. Earth can source it's current level of energy consumption from wind, wave and solar plants if we clad most of the planet with these kind of renewables but it would not be as efficient as a lot of fusion plants. The giant solar tower in Australia and the Sterling motor solar plants look promising but fusion reactors would need less room. A lot of countries just don't have the living space to fill with low producing plants like solar and wind farms. That's what I understand from reading a lot of articles. Fusion would also work on a windless cloudy day and a world filled with fusion reactors would give us a lot more energy to play with than a world filled with other kinds of plants. With oil supplies running out, there will be more wars. To think that politicians ares still fighting over where the ITER tokamak fusion reactor prototype is going to be built (Japan or France) is unbelievable. Every hour they waste could mean a human life they could have saved by preventing an energy war. The bastards responsible should be jailed.
Ridicule of sci-fi
The "The Two Faces of Tomorrow" comic made me realize that we need more science-fiction in our lives. It's weird that sci-fi isn't more popular because it can help us think up solutions to problems that absolutely need to be solved. Humankind would be dead meat if science stopped completely this second. Most people would die without even an animal skin or a house to protect themselves from weather. Fusion is just the continuation of the process that gave us bear skins.
I think it can be explained psychologically. If you don't have knowledge of something like science, it's a good tactic for you personally to ridicule it. That way you can still keep some of your social status because the thing you don't know about is "not important anyway". I hear there are a lot of attacks on science in the USA, are these attackers also renouncing clothes? Ofcourse this phenomenon is everywhere but why is it so big in the US? Not as smart? More fundamentalist? Both? I want every smart person on earth to realize that they are more in the right than fundamentalists who oppose science or stupid people with more determination to make themselves heard. Don't cower, ridicule THEM instead.
"I just want a simple phone without net access" people, doing on slashdot?
On the other hand, don't let yourself be fleeced by greedy companies. TV sounds dumb, use them as wireless ISP instead. They don't want that because they want to be "special" so they can charge "special".
Keep jumping ship to the provider that has the lowest net access and create those "special" services with your own software on your phone. Java MIDP 2.0, Linux or Symbian. I'm talking about Europe.
At least that's my advice.
Re:OpenBSD clusters make my heartbeat faster...
on
OpenBSD 3.7 Released
·
· Score: 1
OpenBSD has a Linux compatibility system, won't it work on that?
Re:OpenBSD clusters make my heartbeat faster...
on
OpenBSD 3.7 Released
·
· Score: 1
Great post and good links, thanks.
I'm also learning how to build a clustered server one step at a time.
You might want to look at my post about Erlang. It's a functional programming language with all the advantages that come with it. In your case you might be interested in the features: - It has an automatically clustered database and webserver. - No buffer overflows - It can automatically use symmetrical multiprocessing.
Questions for you: - With the clustering sofware links you posted, do you still need ECC memory or will RAM redundancy be handled by the cluster software? - What do you think of C-JDBC? It's like RAID-1 for databases instead of drives. I like Java because it has no buffer overflows either.
Good luck with getting the skills, at least we know we're on the right path, like Google.
Copy the updated temp file with a temporary name into the same directory as the file you're going to replace, then do a rename on both files and you will have an even tinier probability of the webserver showing a broken page.
Came up with that on my own once. That means I'm smart.
Would a trusted platform module chip. Or whatever the hardware security system is Microsoft wanted to use in Palladium. Be able to prevent keylogging?
I can imagine that a hardware system like that can be used to enforce that only the program with focus can receive keyboard button presses.
Or is hardware not necessary for that?
As far as I know, once you've installed a malicious program, it can intercept anything between a keyboard and a program. I don't know if software solutions already exist but I can think of this one off the top of my head:
I can imagine that on UNIX-like systems the only part of the os that can talk to the keyboard directly is the kernel. The kernel then detects which program has focus (because it gave it focus) and only sends keypresses to that process
And the kernel would be protected because you didn't log in as root.
How are keyloggers possible if the kernel determines where keypresses end up? Are they able to intercept the stream of keypresses once they leave the protection of the kernel? What happens if you use the 'su' or 'sudo' commands, will the keylogger then have root?
I don't know enough about UNIX yet but I think that if the kernel could forceably limit the information streams coming from hardware to only end up at certain processes, there wouldn't be any need for hardware. Could crypto hardware add anything. And I don't mean 2-factor ID like I use for online banking but crypto in the TPM chip and the keyboard.
Slashdot Mirror
The Erlang language is ideal for multi-core processing because it's very easy to spread a program out over multiple cores with it.
And from the site's FAQ:
3.3. Which licence is Open Source Erlang shipped with?
The Open Source Erlang Licence is essentially the Mozilla (Netscape) Public Licence with a few modifications to make it compatible with Swedish law.
As far as I understand, this means you can obtain Erlang for free, use it to build cool systems and sell them without Ericsson coming around to charge you money. For an authoritative statement, you'll need a lawyer.
It's open source!
I'm guessing the Mozilla Public Licence is open source enough. Can anybody tell me if there are any problems with the Mozilla Public Licence or the licence of Erlang?
As far as I can see, if the open-source community needs a replacement for C, then Erlang or mono would be best. Both their licences are open-source. And Java's Licence isn't.
I want you guys to tell me if this is correct:
- Use Mono C# language and runtime if you want an open-source modern language without buffer overflows and a virtual machine that runs on multiple OSs.
- Erlang to use something with the same features as Mono and if you want to run a single program at full speed on multiple processors(cores) and if you don't mind programming in a functional" programming language.
When the revolution comes, the PS3 and XBOX 360 will be the first against the wall.
Great sig.
Use the Silentmaxx HDD-silencer Rev. 2.0
No noise and no need for a fan cooling the HD to prevent heat-death.
Combine this with RAID-1 and you've got ultra reliability.
If you want to run it as a fanless (reliable) server, using an AMD will enable you to use ECC memory.
I haven't found reliable evidence that the AOpen board is able to use ECC memory with that functionality enabled. Some sites say it can, some sites say it can't.
Another way to look at it:
As (semi)programmers we know that when a file is ready to be downloaded from a server. The person initiating the download is the person who is instructing the server to make a copy.
Who is the copyright infringer in this scenario?
I am not a lawyer but as I understand it, the law is against the act of making a copy, that's why it's called copyright. There's also a seperate law against illegal distribution.
Is the downloader creating the copy? He initiated the process of both the making of the copy and the start of the distribution process.
I know that it's morally true that the "server" operator is responsible in the real world but looking at the letter of the law, and the details of the process, it's the downloader that initiates both processes. It's also true that the person who set up the server is the one who made the whole process possible at all, however, he/she isn't the one who does it.
A good analogy would be a xerox copier just outside of your house with a couple of books next to it, everyone can walk by and copy the books. You're the one who put the copier there and providing the electricity and paper. You're NOT the one forcing people to make the copies and you're also not the person DOING the copying.
P.S. I would like people to discuss this with logical arguments for and against, in the same post if you want to. No twisting the facts with your emotions.
My answer is YES! I'm proud of all those things, except for the last 2 questions.
:)
I don't like the fact that, even though we've lost a lot of our fear of the black dudes coming from our former colony Surinam, we've replaced that with fear of islamic immigrants. Most islamic people I've met were relaxed. Some of them do tend to be too uptight and some mistreat women. Doesn't excuse the Dutch from psychologically putting all of them in the same category.
About my personality. What gave you the idea that I'm neurotic? I'm against neurosis and other strong emotional pressures influencing our important decisions. I thought I explained that.
My personal view is to let people do whatever they want as long as they don't negatively influence others around them. I'm not against emotions in daily life because that's where fun and life comes from. However, let's leave them out of our IMPORTANT decisions. Like who to vote for. Emotions are too easily fooled.
It's scary how easy it is for me to pick up women
Oh and please lighten up.
Dude, you have me wrong, I replied to the /. story "Trust in a Bottle" not to a story about downloading.
/. bug?
Maybe a
Oh, and what I forgot to say. What you SHOULD do is compare the arguments of a topic, reject the bogus arguments immediately and make a decision based on logic using the other arguments.
You have my permission to not trust the man/woman who gives too many false arguments.
That is all.
Never make important decisions based on emotion. Decisions based on fear, anger, hate, love, trust.
One of the most important decisions is voting.
I'm very proud of my sensible Dutch countrymen and I'm very disappointed in the easy-to-fool half of the USA.
Did I just make you feel an emotion? Envy? self-righteousness?
Great sig, so true, so sad, so dangerous /offtopic
If I was a senior exec at Nokia right now I might be thinking 'well fuck you stallman you ungrateful cunt' as I call the legal dept and ask them to start looking into potential patent infrinments of FOSS.
No no, the senior exec at Nokia is thinking: "Shit! Stallman didn't take the bait".
It all starts with the fact that it's legal for politicians to receive money. We'd call it corruption in the Netherlands.
Fix that fatal flaw in US government and you'll have fixed crap like this. In the long run.
It's really very simple, idiots. Most of you are programmers. You're supposed to see how decisions now influence events in the future but I dont' see anyone discussing the root cause of these things.
I don't think either democrats or republicans will do anything about finance reforms and While voting anything other than democrats will end up strengthening republicans (sherriffs of nottingham) in the PRESIDENTIAL elections.
There are still the votes for congress which are NOT winner take all. If you vote for guys like Ralph Nader for CONGRESS then your vote will put a couple of guys that are not corrupt in power. It's not the presidency but it's a start, a start on the way to finance reform. Only AFTER finance reform will you be able to get a non dem/rep president in office.
The goal is finance reform, the method is not dem/rep so vote something else for congressmen.
This is all my personal opinion, who agrees with me?
Arguments FOR:
* Human minds and their memory are weak, anything that can help them grasp what constitutes an application is a good thing. It's easy to keep in mind that everything that's in a certain directory is part of that program. It's almost impossible to remember all the names and locations of the files when a program spreads itself out all over the OS. For a clear mental picture of an application, appfolders are superiour. Think of Murphy's law, something WILL go wrong and fixing an appfolder program is then easier than fixing a traditionally installed program.
* Security: It's easier to configure an operating system so that everything in one directory is limited by permissions XYZ. If you have files spread out over the filesystem, they can have their individual permissions changed accidentally. Lower permissions = application breaks. Higher permissions = security risk. In addition, changing the permission of an application is more complicated.
* No more dependencies: Everything the application needs is present. Dependencies suck! They increase efficiency but they suck because they can make an application not run, or not even install. Dependencies are like spaghetti code on an OS level.
* Usability: Looking at it from a higher level, appfolders have better usability for PC users (all of us). To "install" you just drag the appfolder. To install a traditional program, you'll have to use an install wizard. This wizard is not compatible with the UNIX principle of "everything is a file". This wizard does it's magic, you'll have to hope everything works out well (often doesn't) and if you uninstall a program you'll have to keep your fingers crossed again, hope that the installer finds every little file again to delete. Although it's not rock-hard logic, think about this: Apple has the most user friendly system at the moment and they use appfolders. No matter what the other problems will come up because of using appfolders, there is no doubt that from the end-user's perspective, appfolders are user friendlier. Whatever side of the argument you are one, you'll have to agree that more user frienlyness is better than less user friendlyness. PCs should take away work and problems, not add to them.
#
Arguments AGAINST:
* Efficiency: Having every library that a program needs inside it's own appfolder will probably lead to duplication. The exact same library will probably be inside a couple of different appfolders wasting HD space. On top of that, if you load a traditionally shared library into RAM, it is available to be used by another program as well. This trick will save RAM if 2 or more traditional programs use the same library and are running at the same time.
- Counter argument: Although HD inefficiency is present with appfolders, HD space limitations are not as bad as they have been in the past. Also, there is undoubtedly a simple system that can overcome RAM waste, for example, you can make a big hashlist of all the libraries in a central spot. Before a program starts, it will look in that list to see if a library it needs has already been loaded in RAM.
* Duplication of effort and compatibility: Most of the applications that have been released so far have been traditional installation applications. Converting to the appfolder system would require a lot of work and a lot of convincing of people. Humans are bad at changing the way they think.
#
Please copy the arguments into your post and add to them, in the end we might have a complete overview of the subject and we can make an objective decision on whether appfolders are a good idea overall or not. I'm in favor myself.
Links for more data:
-
I agree with you. I also think that posts in a thread should sometimes make a summary of the arguments for, and against a subject that have been put forward up until that time.
// and I'll read the fucking article next :)
That way, we can compare the list of arguments and the "side" with the best list of arguments "wins" the discussion.
Real simple really, think with logic instead of with your emotions, make overviews of the discussions and decide on merit of the arguments.
I'm going to do that from now on.
Thanks for replying, I have to admit that my post should have been better.
- Didn't know that about oil companies.
- About coal being plentiful enough for our energy needs, I suspect you're right but I hope we won't be needing it.
- Third point, I'm aware that the US is a very science oriented country. However, I didn't really want to comment badly about the US in my post, I was pointing the finger more to illogical fundamentalists wherever they may be. However, I do want to defend my US comment a little bit. Science is mostly about logic and that is in very short supply at the moment in the US government. My perception is that the US is really sliding downhill. Illogical religious fanatics should never be in a position of power, no matter how many or how few there are. Make them heel to logic and punish them if they won't listen and do bad. That was my main point.
No, it's not a ripoff, just an adaptation. Yukinobu Hoshino is the artist and he has a lot of respect for James P. Hogan. I guess Dark Horse made a shorter credit line than they should.
I'm sorry, the corporate spy story might have been from another movie: "The Corporation". Can't remember exactly.
Which approach is better?
I can remember first reading about this fusion concept in the "the two faces of tomorrow" from Dark Horse comics. At the time I thought this was just some ancient sci-fi writer's relic idea on how to achieve fusion, we had tokamak (donut) magnetic fusion reactors now. However, after I read about the real life version of it, I first thought WOW and after that I realized that it might be much simpler to ignite a fusion reaction and then back off to let it run wild than to try to contain a fusion reaction in a magnetic bubble. The concept sounds simpler. They're having trouble with manufacturing the hydrogen pellet however, so the tokamak reactor might have a steadier flow of energy coming out of it if they get the concept to work smoothly.
old-energy corporations
Oil, gas and coal companies might not want this to work. I remember the piece in Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911" about the corporate spy who told his own story. I think he came clean out of guilt over what he'd done in the past. Point I'm trying to make is, there might be a lot of opposition to this project and I hope that they have a lot of security on site. They probably have because this is mostly a military project.
The need for fusion
I do think earth will eventually need fusion reactors, at least the USA needs it. Earth can source it's current level of energy consumption from wind, wave and solar plants if we clad most of the planet with these kind of renewables but it would not be as efficient as a lot of fusion plants. The giant solar tower in Australia and the Sterling motor solar plants look promising but fusion reactors would need less room. A lot of countries just don't have the living space to fill with low producing plants like solar and wind farms. That's what I understand from reading a lot of articles. Fusion would also work on a windless cloudy day and a world filled with fusion reactors would give us a lot more energy to play with than a world filled with other kinds of plants. With oil supplies running out, there will be more wars. To think that politicians ares still fighting over where the ITER tokamak fusion reactor prototype is going to be built (Japan or France) is unbelievable. Every hour they waste could mean a human life they could have saved by preventing an energy war. The bastards responsible should be jailed.
Ridicule of sci-fi
The "The Two Faces of Tomorrow" comic made me realize that we need more science-fiction in our lives. It's weird that sci-fi isn't more popular because it can help us think up solutions to problems that absolutely need to be solved. Humankind would be dead meat if science stopped completely this second. Most people would die without even an animal skin or a house to protect themselves from weather. Fusion is just the continuation of the process that gave us bear skins.
I think it can be explained psychologically. If you don't have knowledge of something like science, it's a good tactic for you personally to ridicule it. That way you can still keep some of your social status because the thing you don't know about is "not important anyway". I hear there are a lot of attacks on science in the USA, are these attackers also renouncing clothes? Ofcourse this phenomenon is everywhere but why is it so big in the US? Not as smart? More fundamentalist? Both? I want every smart person on earth to realize that they are more in the right than fundamentalists who oppose science or stupid people with more determination to make themselves heard. Don't cower, ridicule THEM instead.
"I just want a simple phone without net access" people, doing on slashdot?
On the other hand, don't let yourself be fleeced by greedy companies. TV sounds dumb, use them as wireless ISP instead. They don't want that because they want to be "special" so they can charge "special".
Keep jumping ship to the provider that has the lowest net access and create those "special" services with your own software on your phone. Java MIDP 2.0, Linux or Symbian. I'm talking about Europe.
At least that's my advice.
OpenBSD has a Linux compatibility system, won't it work on that?
Great post and good links, thanks.
I'm also learning how to build a clustered server one step at a time.
You might want to look at my post about Erlang. It's a functional programming language with all the advantages that come with it. In your case you might be interested in the features:
- It has an automatically clustered database and webserver.
- No buffer overflows
- It can automatically use symmetrical multiprocessing.
Questions for you:
- With the clustering sofware links you posted, do you still need ECC memory or will RAM redundancy be handled by the cluster software?
- What do you think of C-JDBC? It's like RAID-1 for databases instead of drives. I like Java because it has no buffer overflows either.
Good luck with getting the skills, at least we know we're on the right path, like Google.
Renaming is even faster than copying.
Copy the updated temp file with a temporary name into the same directory as the file you're going to replace, then do a rename on both files and you will have an even tinier probability of the webserver showing a broken page.
Came up with that on my own once. That means I'm smart.
Would a trusted platform module chip. Or whatever the hardware security system is Microsoft wanted to use in Palladium. Be able to prevent keylogging?
I can imagine that a hardware system like that can be used to enforce that only the program with focus can receive keyboard button presses.
Or is hardware not necessary for that?
As far as I know, once you've installed a malicious program, it can intercept anything between a keyboard and a program.
I don't know if software solutions already exist but I can think of this one off the top of my head:
I can imagine that on UNIX-like systems the only part of the os that can talk to the keyboard directly is the kernel. The kernel then detects which program has focus (because it gave it focus) and only sends keypresses to that process
And the kernel would be protected because you didn't log in as root.
How are keyloggers possible if the kernel determines where keypresses end up? Are they able to intercept the stream of keypresses once they leave the protection of the kernel? What happens if you use the 'su' or 'sudo' commands, will the keylogger then have root?
I don't know enough about UNIX yet but I think that if the kernel could forceably limit the information streams coming from hardware to only end up at certain processes, there wouldn't be any need for hardware. Could crypto hardware add anything. And I don't mean 2-factor ID like I use for online banking but crypto in the TPM chip and the keyboard.
Phishers could take screenies everytime a mouse has been clicked inside a browser that's at a certain website.
Makes it more data intensive but it's a possibility.